Second test: Does EF proc RPPM effects? Tested by building up HP and self-casting Eternal Flame, first with an Elemental Force weapon (control) and then with Windsong (test). Result: 0 EF procs observed:

Applied and maintained Seal of Truth on two low-level training dummies for ~8 minutes, naked with 0% haste and an EF-enchanted weapon. Observed 44 procs in 485 seconds, or roughly one proc every 11 seconds, only about ~5.5 procs per minute. Oddly low compared to the expected ~10 PPM. It does not appear that RPPM effects are calculated per-target, at any rate.

Control run: attacked a single low-level training dummy for ~15 minutes to see if the proc rate increased or decreased significantly.http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt-e ... s=11&e=98688 procs in 975 seconds, again almost exactly 11 seconds between procs, or 5.4 RPPM. Something seems funny with EF - it may not be the proc rate advertised.

In any event, this test confirms that multi-dotting doesn't increase the proc rate.

Observed procs on glances, but not a single proc from a missed, dodged, or parried attack in ~10 minutes of auto-attacks. The advertised behavior of being able to proc on missed/dodged/parried attacks is patently false.

Notably, I saw quite a few "double procs," where one glanced melee attack would trigger two Elemental Force procs. So it's clear that the implementation actually rolls twice per melee attack if you have both weapons enchanted while dual-wielding, rather than simply doubling the probability accumulation rate and rolling once.

Also observed quite a few missed EF procs (as in, the effect procced but missed the target), including only one miss in a pair of procs from a single attack. So each proc also makes its own independent hit/miss roll, presumably on the spell hit table.

I've been blanketing the poor Theck with requests, but, alas, it has paid off. Very interesting results.

Three distinct notes :1. We'll need to test EtFl again, once 5.1 goes live, with the other RPPM options.2. ElFo's proc chance is peculiar, but at this point I don't think it warrants special testing. Discerning between 5 and 6 RPPM would need a long test (1h+), therefore I suggest to postpone it until 5.1.3. Regarding the last bit, I'm not really sure what to make of it. Did any "blue" explicitly state that RPPM dynamic effects would/should be triggered on cast ? To me that statement looked conspicuous from the very beginning, thus I've asked you to actually give it a shot.

[list][*]River's Song: 2PPM on melee attacks that land, or are dodged, or parried.[*]Dancing Steel: 1PPM on melee attacks that land.[*]Colossus: 3PPM on melee attacks that land, or are dodged, or parried, with a 3-second cooldown.[*]Elemental Force: 5PPM on melee damage, or non-periodic spell damage/healing, with a 0.1-second cooldown.[*]Jade Spirit: 10% chance on spell damage or healing, 50-second cooldown.[*]Windsong: 1PPM on melee damage, or non-periodic spell damage/healing, with a 1-second cooldown.

The RPPM post doesn't mention dodge/parry at all. So we'll have to wait until 5.1 to test whether that remains the case with the RPPM implementation of RS and Colossus.

I got logged off while doing the melee attack speed test. Is the data collected sufficient? If not, I'll have to try and log another hour or two Friday or Saturday.

My Holy Wrath (no glyphs that interact with the ability) is doing 25740-25741 (does one or the other) damage to a level 90 training dummy right now (18:29 CET, 4th Dec). It deals the same amount of damage to a boss level training dummy.

While we've exhaustively tested offensive armor formulas, it seems we haven't done our due diligence on the defensive side. So far we've been using K=58370 for the armor constant of a level 90 player. Technically we use a formula which gives this number, but I don't remember testing the formula during beta (nor documenting it in this thread). My best guess is that it's from another source, either early beta datamining or it's the equation we've been using since Cataclysm.

In any event, it seems pretty clear that it's wrong. I was testing some things today and noticed that with 57030 armor, I had 55.21% damage reduction on my character sheet rather than the 49.42% predicted by A/(A+K). I took a quick data set of armor and character sheet mitigation:

From this, it seems that the armor constant at L90 is actually K=46259 +/-3. I would appreciate some additional data sets from anyone who's got 5-10 minutes to spare. All I need is the character sheet armor values and mitigation percentages (from the armor tooltip). Level 90 paladins only, class/race/spec shouldn't matter. As many data points as you can submit would be great, ideally everything from naked to fully geared.

It continues on to level 93. Just to clarify to make sure there are no misunderstandings, adding denotation for which variables are of the target and which are of the attacker:DamageReduction = TargetArmor / (TargetArmor + 4037.5*AttackerLevel – 317117.5).

Exactly what Klaud posted - x is the target's armor, K is the associated (and level-dependent) armor constant. And the formula he posted is exactly what I'm using. However, it's clear to me now what's going on: the character sheet is giving armor reduction against a level 90, whereas we care about armor reduction against a level 93. I was just too tired to realize that last night.

It would be awfully nice if the armor tooltip gave mitigation percentages against various levels of attacker, much like it does for hit/exp.